GMF

I couldn''t possibly condone such childish behaviour, but it will give my uncle in New Zealand something to read on Christmas Day ;-)

1st Wizzard In a perfect world, no one would have such a siginificant shareholding, although there is nothing to prevent this club being 100% owned by one individuial, if they so desired, other than lack of finances, of course. Please remember how this situation came about. The Fat Man had a majority share holding, which he sold, if memory serves me correct, to Watling. No-one had any problems with that at the time and Delia and her husband subsequently acquired the majority holding. They, together with other directors, partly underwrote the last share issue. Had this of been 100% taken up by the general public, they would have had 50.1% of all shares. It wasn''t, so they ended up with a higher percentage. That percentage will reduce if the current share application is 100% taken up. As I say, doesn''t make it right, but with a private limited company, such situations aren''t uncommon. Incidentially, it''s the executive officers who run this club on a day to day basis, not the Board. The directors hold regular board meeting to review progress, or lack thereof, review budgets etc.

Come on guys, let''s get some grip on the financial reality here. Just because Huckerby is going home, doesn''t mean all things green and yellow stop exisitng after Saturday. Okay, if some have had enough and feel let down, that''s up to you. Me, I''ve been supporting Norwich far too long to realise that such things happen on a regular basis. And, yes, I keep coming back. More fool me, you may say, but if I had wanted to support a club that was always successful, won plenty of games, continually made a profit, can buy virtually any player they want and not worry about the financial consequences, I''d of headed for the hills years ago and ended up supporting some one like Man Utd. SOME CHOICE !!!!!!!

Beelsie Not sure if you were responded to Gazzathegreat or me with you post, hopefully me? There seems to be an element of confusion on the part of some here on this message board, i.e. having a vague grasp of financial reality means you naturally support the Board. Not necessarily so, although I''ve heard enough directly from certain Executive Officers at the club to know who I''d rather have running the club. They aren''t perfect, but neither are they totally stupid. Cryptic, perhaps, but is anyone genuinely surprised that Huckerby is going back???? Watch this space.

Loyalty to the Board, doesn''t come in to it, although financial reality certainly does !!!!

What a heavy post Bury Belvoir. This message board is free to all comers, all views welcomed across the spectrum, offensive comments excepted. It does not matter how long people have supported the club, who has made the biggest contribution over the years, whether you are a student or a managing director. It''s about supporting or not supporting the decisions made by those running the club we all follow, which will, at the end of the day, hopefully, out survive us all. Whether we like it or not, we have a Board of Directors and Executive Officers charged with running this club on a day to day basis. They make the decisions, they make good ones and bad ones. Some we will agree with, others we will not. We also have a manager and coaches charged with running the footballing side of the business, who have similar decisions to make. Again, similar comments apply. We all have opinions on the way this football club is run. Some have simplictic reasoning, others more logical reasoning. Who''s to say who is right or wrong. Feel free to take the Michael of those you don''t agree with, and provoke debate, if that''s your wish, but don''t make judgemental comments on the merits of respective contributors, just because you disagree with their views. If you''ve had enough with your lot at Carrow Road, that''s your choice, but don''t berate those who haven''t.

I''m also a shareholder and I too have received just the application for new shares, addressed Dear Season Ticket holder or member. The letter also refers to accounts being circulated to Shareholders, but, as at this morning, no accounts have been received.

1st Wizard I don''t think anyone here is against you holding your opinion, even though many disagree with it. Indeed, it is shared by many others on this site. Likewise, there''s no rule suggesting you should keep your mouth shut until May. Many just seem to think that you''re ignoring the financial reality of where we are at. This squad is the smallest I can remember for many a year and there are many reasons for that. Added to the fact that the "Loan market" has changed dramatically over the last few seasons, partly explains why we have gone down the route we have. You either play the loan game, or get lefted behind. Sometimes it works, others it doesn''t - (just who is Elvis Hammond?). There''s one heck of a difference between loaning three players for three months at circa half million quid and buying one player, let''s call him Huckerby, when the total package, (transfer fees, wages, pension contributions etc), over a three or four year period is likely to in excess of £4m. I strongly suspect that there will be further ventures into the loan market in the foreseeable future.

Thanks Master Green, my initial post was answered by this morning''s storey on Pink Un web site. I''m sure this storey is going to cause some amusement down the A140, especially if he does decide to come up with £5m for their share offer. It would, of course, be simplistic to say we didn''t want his money. Of course any club would. However, that wasn''t what he was offering. He wanted to buy a controlling interest in the club, which isn''t the same thing. As things stand at the moment, there aren''t £5m worth of shares available for him to purchase. He would be buying existing shares from existing shareholders, with no money initially going to the club. I can''t help but feel that he went about the whole process in the wrong way. If he geniunely wanted a stake in the club, he could have subscribed to the share issue like anyone else. He could also of then opened up discussions, in private, with existing shareholders, to increase his stake. Finally, to state, as has been reported, that if he didn''t get what he wanted, he''d go down the road, is insensitive in the extreme. With that subtle approach, he''s welcome anywhere but Carrow Road !!!

Blue Moon If you''ve got a meaningful contribution to add to this board, you''re welcome to stay. Looks like the answer to that question is ......... No !!!!

Can someone just clairify one point here for me, as, living in Essex, I didn''t see any of the local press when this storey first broke. Was this man actually offering £5m to buy new shares? If so, he''s going to be out of luck, there is only just over £1m available for exisitng shareholders to apply for and the club are currently restricted on the number of new shares it can make available. If his offer was merely to buy exisiting shares from Delia and her husband, then the money for the purchase would go to them, not the club, as seems to have been reported at the time. Perhaps I''m missing something here?

Spot on A1 Canary. 1st Wizzard, wake up and feel the financial reality !!! There are too many people round hear who are only too eager to point the finger at the Board when things don''t go as they want, totally ignoring the financial situation we are in. There''s no point "burying your heads in the sand" here. Fact. We lost over £4m last year. Fact. We are highly likely to have a similar operating loss next year. Fact. Crouch always said he wanted to prove himself in the Premiership, preferably with Villa. Fact. Crouch was always on a 3 month loan and O''Leary made that clear from day one. Fact. Huckerby could still sign, but the chances are slim. None of the above has anything to do with the Board being short sighted or wanting to remain in this division. On the contary, they want to get the the Premiership as soon as possible. They seriously recognise the financial situation we are in, unlike some here. If you speak to them, and I have, there are many things happening behind the scenes. However, you have to realise, that in the majority of situations, they are hardly likely to broadcast such details in advance. If you want to call that a lack of ambition, so be it.

That must be why he dropped the ball at Malky''s feet to let us score !!!!

I''m struggling to find anything positive to take from the latest set of accounts. I''ll be interested to see the breakdown of £16.9m expenditure, as this is a hugh amount. I''m also left wondering what the increases in turnover for catering and commercial activities actually mean for bottom line profits.

1st Wizz Take a Chill pill mate. There''s probably a very good reason why the Board haven''t come out and said they aren''t going to sign these players. Negiotations are still ongoing !!! Okay, so we''re never going to get all 3, let''s be realistic. Add the fact that Nigel has since suggested that Harper "may" have played his last game for the Canaries, probably due to injury, and that buying Crouch was never an option. That just leaves one possible loan extension and one possible purchase. All I''ll say for the moment is, just reread the penultimate sentence of Neil Doncaster''s comments this morning. Puzzled? Watch this space !!!!

Anyone who hasn''t read it yet, have a look at Neil Doncaster''s lastest report on the EDP site. A full, frank assessment of where we are.

I suspect some on this board may find this strange. However, I forgave Marsh for the "error of his ways" months ago and the reason is simple. Anyone who can trouser £15K a week from that lot down the A140, for doing absolutely nothing, is okay in my books. Another "quality" decision from ITFC. LOL.

It''s certainly starting to look like a game of spoof and, despite what I said earlier, it''s always possible that Man City may decide they want to spin this out until the 1st January, in order to try and bring other Premiership clubs into the equation.

There would also have to be a collection box by the enterance, that gives change, "Only 5 pence in the Pound", of course. And perhaps a statue of Craig Forrest, remember him? To celebrate the time he was named "Man of The Match" for his performance on that "never to be forgotten" day at Old Trafford, when he let in 9 goals?

This garden would have to have a big patch of grass in the middle, about 75 yards wide, with two painted white lines running parallel to each edge. There would need to be a bag of balls at one end with a printed labelled message taped thereto, (no joined up letters though, that would prove too difficult to read). The message would have to read something like, "Keep the balls off the grass". No problems with that then Marsh !!!!

I think the comments attributed to, or actually made by, Huckerby are misleading. Please correct me if I''m wrong, but the process here is that the clubs have to agree a fee first before the acquiring club can talk to the player? So, Man City quote a fee to us, which we don''t match, a highly probable situation. So they then talk to other clubs. Even if they then agree a fee with someone else, if Huckerby really wants to play for us, he can simply fail to agree terms with the 3rd party club, so Man City are back to square one. This situation could continue until Man City are left with the choice. Either accept our fee or continue to pay the player''s wages. Player power exists, as happened with Rob Hulse and Crewe in the summer. I personally think it is misleading to the fans to suggest it is just down to the respective clubs to agree a fee. It''s not, the player has a major part to play. At the end of the day, if the player doesn''t want to go to this club or that club, he just carrys on where he is until he gets what he wants.

Beelsie You''ve hit the nail on the head. Like it or not, we''re £15M in debt and currently operating with a trading lose of circa £3-4M per annum. The "Speculate to Accumlate" group are, effectively, endorsing adding a further £3-4M to this debt. If we don''t, the Board are showing "a lack of ambition". There are too many variables and interested parties to guarentee us being able to do a deal. At the end of the day, the players may decide just to stay put, rather than come here. The clubs in question could, just change their minds. From what I''ve heard, the manager wants either Crouch or Huckerby, preferably both, BUT and it''s a BIG BUT, not at any price. Neither the manager or the Board want to commit financial sucide on this one. Problem is, the Board just can''t win. Don''t sign and there will be public uproar, as many will percieve that the chance of promotion has gone. Do sign and the financial problems just get worse. I''m not trying to make excuses here for anyone, just trying to add a small degree of financial reality to what has gone before.

Smudge You''re right regarding the names you mentioned for transfers, although it was a major shock when they came out with those statements, because that isn''t the way they usually do it. Are you really serious regarding your final statement on McVeigh? Do you really beleive they they would just let a player walk out at the end of his contract without any negotiations? I don''t !!!

You''re probably right, in as much nothing has been mentioned in public. However, as has been said several times before, just because there hasn''t been an announcement, doesn''t mean that negiotations aren''t ongoing. Norwich have often stated they don''t conduct such matters as contracts or transfers via the media. From what I''m lead to believe, Norwich do try and resolve these matters about 12 months prior to expiry of contracts, but it does take both parties to agree for a deal to be done.

I agree with much of the above. Nevertheless, it''s not just down to the Board. Because of Bosman, players over 23 can just "sit tight" during the final year of their contract and see what options are available to them. The Board and manager can make as many offers as they like, whenever they like, but the player doesn''t have to accept them if they don''t want to. Like many First Division clubs, most of our players are on 3 year contracts, so any talks relating to new contracts are going to start 12 - 18 months prior to the end of the existing contracts.